BMC anesthesiology · 2024
Assessment of intermediate phase post anesthesia quality of recovery and its affecting factors.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Markos Zekarias, Amsalu Hunde, Mequanint Addisu, Yirga Samson, Simegn Atsedu Endale, Kassegn Ayenew
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Recovery after surgery and anesthesia is dependent on patient, surgical, and anesthetic characteristics, as well as the presence of any of numerous adverse sequelae. Postoperative recovery is a complex and multidimensional process that requires a holistic view of the recovery of capacities and homeostasis after anesthesia and surgery.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the quality of recovery after anesthesia and its affecting factors at Wachamo University Nigist Eleni Mohamed Memorial Comprehensive Hospital.
METHOD: a prospective observational study was conducted at Wachamo University Nigist Eleni Mohamed Memorial Comprehensive Hospital among 384 surgical patients who undergone under anesthesia. Quality of recovery was assessed by using Quality of Recovery 40. Student t-test and one-way ANOVA were utilized to compare the mean of Quality of recovery in different groups. Binary regression was used to find out the factors affecting Quality of recovery quality of recovery. SPSS 27 was used for analysis. A p-value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
RESULT: Sex and smoking history were the factors that we failed to find an association with poor quality of recovery. Preoperative antiemetic administration; premedication with benzodiazepines and emergency procedures were the factors that show potential relation with poor quality of recovery after anesthesia and surgery. Procedures performed under general anesthesia; Patients who had coexisting diseases; post-anesthesia incidence of nausea and vomiting; Visual Analog Scale score >/= 7 during discharge and prolonged duration of surgery were the factors that had a significant association with poor quality of recovery.
CONCLUSION: The magnitude of good quality of recovery was 65.6% whereas 34.4% scored poor quality of recovery. The predictors for the prevalence of poor quality of recovery were found to be orthopedic procedures; procedures undergone under general anesthesia; incidence of post-anesthesia nausea and vomiting; prolonged length of the procedure and severity of pain.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the quality of recovery after anesthesia and its affecting factors at Wachamo University Nigist Eleni Mohamed Memorial Comprehensive Hospital.
METHOD: a prospective observational study was conducted at Wachamo University Nigist Eleni Mohamed Memorial Comprehensive Hospital among 384 surgical patients who undergone under anesthesia. Quality of recovery was assessed by using Quality of Recovery 40. Student t-test and one-way ANOVA were utilized to compare the mean of Quality of recovery in different groups. Binary regression was used to find out the factors affecting Quality of recovery quality of recovery. SPSS 27 was used for analysis. A p-value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
RESULT: Sex and smoking history were the factors that we failed to find an association with poor quality of recovery. Preoperative antiemetic administration; premedication with benzodiazepines and emergency procedures were the factors that show potential relation with poor quality of recovery after anesthesia and surgery. Procedures performed under general anesthesia; Patients who had coexisting diseases; post-anesthesia incidence of nausea and vomiting; Visual Analog Scale score >/= 7 during discharge and prolonged duration of surgery were the factors that had a significant association with poor quality of recovery.
CONCLUSION: The magnitude of good quality of recovery was 65.6% whereas 34.4% scored poor quality of recovery. The predictors for the prevalence of poor quality of recovery were found to be orthopedic procedures; procedures undergone under general anesthesia; incidence of post-anesthesia nausea and vomiting; prolonged length of the procedure and severity of pain.